[Egg Salad]

Just wanted to brag a bit and while doing so, praising Sigma.
I now only have one lens to go for my complete lens line-up.
And only one of these isn't a Sigma - the Pentax DA* 16-50. But if Sigma would offer a sealed 17-50 I'm quite sure I had bought this one instead of the Pentax 16-50. In fact that's the only thing I miss on third party offers - proper sealing (or sealing at all).

First two Sigma lenses I had (Sigma 24mm f/2.8 "Macro" and 28mm f/1.8 Aspherical) weren't great but okay for their price. But every lens of the last years is simply great.

Sigma 1.8/28 Macro: useable wide open, awesomely sharp at f/4, going ridiciously close (18cm or so),

Sigma 70-200 II HSM Macro: best built modern lens I have (only beaten by SMC Pentax series) - even better than my 16-50, already very sharp from f/3.5 up to 135mm, practically perfect at f/5.6, useful close focus capability, offering something I value very much: gear reduction - giving you twice the focus travel

and lastly
Sigma 105mm Macro: got it today so I don't have much experience yet but what it did till now was almost flawless. Very decent built (metal barrel) and - to be expected - very sharp and very even sharpness/resolution distribution (low edge falloff).

Not a lens but also a Sigma accessory: Sigma's EM 140 DG: got it today along with the 105 Macro but from what I can say right now it is the best flash I ever used (I'd say better than my Metz 48 AF-1 - in its limitations of course).

Next and probably the last stop (my bag is at its limit...) will be the 1.4/50 HSM.

Your cameras aren't that attractive but your lenses surely are. Bravo!

and EDIT:
Other than Pentax for example they give you a very nice case for every lens, the EM 140 DG ringflash even got its own shoulder bag with place for accessories and stuff. Great service (no experience with actual customer service, talking about the things they give you with every item only).

---

Last edited by Egg Salad; 10-19-2010 at 10:59 AM. Reason: Forgot something.

[Eagle_Friends]

No sigma 8-16?

[Ash]

Good stuff. I'm a Tamron guy but I can't discount the good results you can get from some Sigmas, esp. 70 macro.

[Egg Salad]

Don't lead my into temptation...
Totally forgot about my wide end. I rarely "need" something that wide. But I can't deny that this would be another nice addition - especially because I never had something that wide (only tried how it would look by attaching the 16-50 to my Pentax SFX). Would look for a manual prime like the Rokinon/Walimex/whatever 8mm Fisheye then. If the lenses I have weren't so cheap I wouldn't own them now.

Initially I wanted the Tamron 70-200 but they were too rare and I just happened to win an auction on the Sigma. And because I'm a pedant I try to keep my line-up "clean" - meaning to stay with one manufacturer only. Sigma won (except the Pentax 16-50). Especially because of their great built.
If the 70mm Macro wouldn't be that short I would have chosen that one instead. But 105mm just fits me better. Don't want to get that close.

I'd be interested to know how much sales Pentax loses because of the gaps in their line-up.
There are several lenses people want that aren't offered by Pentax - like a fast normal prime (Sigma 1.8/28) or a classic tele-lens (70-200). Or if they are they are simply too expensive (31ltd vs my Sigma: bought the Sigma used for 225€...).

[mugund]

Quick question: I am debating between sigma 30mm f1.4 Versus Sigma 28mm f1.8. Is the sigma 28mm macro sharp wideopen? How about at apertures F2.8/4.0/5.6? Is it edge to edge sharp? It is okay if it is not edge to edge sharp at corners at apertures 1.8/2.0 etc as long as they are very sharp in the center in those apertures, it is fine for me. I am using pentax F50mm 1.7 and getting the prime addiction . Please let me know

Thanks,
Mugundhan

[systemA]

I've been eyeing the 70/2.8 macro

[Tommot1965]

Id like a sigma 70-200 OS HSM..the new version..quite expensive at the MO..but some very good reviews and high IQ from tests Ive seen so far

Id question your compulsion in Keeping your Lenses " clean" as in only one manufacturer in your kit bag ...its been my experience so far that every so often a manufacturer will produce a freak lens,,that is affordable and pin sharp....just cause it aint a sigma shouldn't stop you considering it....you may very well be doing yourself a injustice

[Blue]

Just wanted to brag a bit and while doing so, praising Sigma.
I now only have one lens to go for my complete lens line-up.
And only one of these isn't a Sigma - the Pentax DA* 16-50. But if Sigma would offer a sealed 17-50 I'm quite sure I had bought this one instead of the Pentax 16-50. In fact that's the only thing I miss on third party offers - proper sealing (or sealing at all).

First two Sigma lenses I had (Sigma 24mm f/2.8 "Macro" and 28mm f/1.8 Aspherical) weren't great but okay for their price. But every lens of the last years is simply great.

Sigma 1.8/28 Macro: useable wide open, awesomely sharp at f/4, going ridiciously close (18cm or so),

Sigma 70-200 II HSM Macro: best built modern lens I have (only beaten by SMC Pentax series) - even better than my 16-50, already very sharp from f/3.5 up to 135mm, practically perfect at f/5.6, useful close focus capability, offering something I value very much: gear reduction - giving you twice the focus travel

and lastly
Sigma 105mm Macro: got it today so I don't have much experience yet but what it did till now was almost flawless. Very decent built (metal barrel) and - to be expected - very sharp and very even sharpness/resolution distribution (low edge falloff).

Not a lens but also a Sigma accessory: Sigma's EM 140 DG: got it today along with the 105 Macro but from what I can say right now it is the best flash I ever used (I'd say better than my Metz 48 AF-1 - in its limitations of course).

Next and probably the last stop (my bag is at its limit...) will be the 1.4/50 HSM.

Your cameras aren't that attractive but your lenses surely are. Bravo!

and EDIT:
Other than Pentax for example they give you a very nice case for every lens, the EM 140 DG ringflash even got its own shoulder bag with place for accessories and stuff. Great service (no experience with actual customer service, talking about the things they give you with every item only).

I have the 105 and the EM 140 and agree with you. The flash controls are more complicated than necessary but that's my only complaint.

[Pentaxor]

sad that the Sigma 150 is still not available for the K-mount. however, Pentax people should be glad that there is now an 85mm Sigma which had been missing in the Pentax line-up for a long time and that Pentax had neglected as well.

the lens had been receiving a lot of praises, coming from the very tough Canon fanboys and that tells a lot. of course, there are those "L" lens freaks still, but their numbers are numbered as they are slowly getting enticed by the new Sigma.

[axl]

the lens had been receiving a lot of praises, coming from the very tough Canon fanboys and that tells a lot. of course, there are those "L" lens freaks still, but their numbers are numbered as they are slowly getting enticed by the new Sigma.

wait until some folks start comparing it to Pentax 85s or 77ltd... they you'll see the hardcore fanboysm

truth though... from the examples I've seen so far it seems to be mighty impressive lens, but with the price tag that matches Pentax's 77

[axl]

on Sigma in general?
I had 105 macro EX DG. It was great lens, but tad bigger I'd like and the two step declutching for MF was just plain stupid. But the build, IQ and AF are superb. The only lens in that segment I liked more was FA100/2.8 (not the DFA, the actual FA sereis) but it was bigger and heavier...
I still have 10-20/4-5.6 EC DC. Haven't used it for a while now but i still regard it as best lens in it's segment, all aspects considered.
Other than that... Oh, I used to have 24/2.8 SWII AF. Not much to brag about IMO.
One thing I never liked with Sigmas is their size... the IQ is hit and miss, some glass is perfect, some is just... well, let's say not so perfect
I like Sigma more than Tamron and Tokina, but I don't think I'll be replacing my SMC glass with Sigma equivalents any time soon....

[Blue]

on Sigma in general?
I had 105 macro EX DG. It was great lens, but tad bigger I'd like and the two step declutching for MF was just plain stupid. But the build, IQ and AF are superb. The only lens in that segment I liked more was FA100/2.8 (not the DFA, the actual FA sereis) but it was bigger and heavier...
I still have 10-20/4-5.6 EC DC. Haven't used it for a while now but i still regard it as best lens in it's segment, all aspects considered.
Other than that... Oh, I used to have 24/2.8 SWII AF. Not much to brag about IMO.
One thing I never liked with Sigmas is their size... the IQ is hit and miss, some glass is perfect, some is just... well, let's say not so perfect
I like Sigma more than Tamron and Tokina, but I don't think I'll be replacing my SMC glass with Sigma equivalents any time soon....

I don't know of a 100 or a 105mm that is really any smaller or lighter than the Sigma. Even the Nikon 105 micro-nikkor lenses are about the same size and maybe heavier.

[Mike.P®]

I don't know of a 100 or a 105mm that is really any smaller or lighter than the Sigma. Even the Nikon 105 micro-nikkor lenses are about the same size and maybe heavier.

Pentax D-FA 100mm has got to be lighter .. theres nothing to it.
Probably smaller as well.

[Blue]

Pentax D-FA 100mm has got to be lighter .. theres nothing to it.
Probably smaller as well.

It turns out to be lighter at 345 grams compared to 450 for the Sigma. The Sigma just doesn't seem all that large to me at 95mm (3.8 inches and 16 ounces). I guess that's because of being used to the Vivitar S1 and the Nikkor. The Nikkor has some weight to it at 790 grams an 116mm in length, but it is an excellent macro.

[Eagle_Friends]

I've owned the DFA 100mm Macro WR for a couple of months, and it is much small than any Sigma or Tamron. It is practically the same size as the kit lens.